The "courage" to mock Jesus Christ ...

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
62,021
45,748
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
Okay, do you (with an open mind) accept the possibility that your god does not exist?
When John the Baptist was in prison about to be beheaded by Herod Antipas, he sent a couple of his disciples to Jesus to ask him, (paraphrased) "It really is you, right?" Jesus sent him word back telling John to remember everything he had seen and heard. If John the Baptist, Jesus' cousin, who leapt in the womb when Jesus was near (also while in the womb), who baptized Jesus in the river Jordan and saw the Holy Spirit descend on him, had a moment of doubt... then who are we to be above moments of doubt from time to time. We are no less human than John TB.

That's what gets me about atheists. They won't admit to having any doubts. They are lying.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
62,021
45,748
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
except for the fact that a Norwhale does exist and a Unicorn does not.
That is the way it is with science. Old theories give way to new ones. Things that once seemed ridiculous become accepted, and things that were once accepted become antiquated and ridiculous. That isn't an "attack." That's progress.

What I'm trying to convey, is to me the belief in god is the same as fantasy.
I understand. I was once an agnostic. God provided me evidence I couldn't refute.
 

panhandler62

Territorial Marshal
Mar 26, 2008
7,646
868
743
Martinsburg, WV
Okay, do you (with an open mind) accept the possibility that your god does not exist?
That has been my belief for more of my life than not and I still accept the possibility. Everything I experiance of God might possibly be rationalization but, as the experiance has proved entirerly possitive, reason dictates that I stay the course with faith.
 
May 3, 2010
380
0
0
It would be nice if there's heaven. I don't want to no longer exist. I don't want my family to no longer exist. But, unfortunately, I think that's the way it is.

However, I do agree that you can't prove there's no God. How could you prove that an all powerful being hasn't made the evidence that seems to prove their lack of existence? So if being an atheist means being absolutely certain there's no God, then I'm agnostic. An agnostic that thinks that the probability that there is a God is very small.
 
O

osupride97

Guest
I have questioned God's existence many times in my life. However, He has shown Himself over and over and over and over again to me. I "choose" to believe what the Word tells me. I find peace, when I'm not trying to control situations myself, in Him and His Word.

John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

I think my new signature says it all - for me anyway.
 

HUH?

Wrangler
Feb 9, 2007
225
0
566
So Comedy Central is making a show about the big JC.
Got to say I'm not surprised and I don't see how this is any different than 3 or 4 other shows where Jesus is a prominent character on that network.

Also, I just read 11 pages of 4-5 people saying the same thing 15 times a piece. I think we all know where everyone stands. Especially super scientist I may or may not believe in God guy. Really, for a scientist, I thought you'd be better at making your two points and maybe backing up them up a couple of times. Yet I read every response. Silly me.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
10,800
6,361
1,743
Landlocked
Okay, do you (with an open mind) accept the possibility that your god does not exist? Since you dont believe that god does not exist, why dont you seek that resolution? Why have you stopped seeking the truth and instead have decided to accept what you believe to be true? In essence, a christian asking an atheist (or anyone of any other worldview or belief) why he does not believe or seek the christian god could just as easily ask the opposite question of himself. It is wholly possible that you are wrong. So why do you not pursue that? To me, excluding the the possibility that YOU ARE WRONG is a very closed-minded approach. Nobody likes to imagine that everything they've ever known about something is a lie. It's something most people would ignore if they were faced with that prospect. Most christians would scoff at the thought while at the same time tell an atheist he should seek god. That is a double standard that seems to go ignored by all those people who try to convert the rest of us.
I explore the possibility of God not existing most days, actually. Why do you assume that my conclusions are incorrect? Are you telling me that we should have NO conclusions......ever? If one is not allowed to arrive at their own conclusion, then what is the point of science or the search for truth?

What's the point of being open-minded if we're never allowed to come to a conclusion? What's the purpose of researching a matter, examining the arguments for and against the various theories, and weighing the merit of each if at the end of the day we can't say one option is better than another?

To the second bolded part - most atheists scoff at Christians and their "belief". Your double standard is evident as well. Closing your mind to the idea of God is just as close-minded.
 
Feb 11, 2007
3,810
1,812
1,743
Oklahoma City
I explore the possibility of God not existing most days, actually. Why do you assume that my conclusions are incorrect? Are you telling me that we should have NO conclusions......ever? If one is not allowed to arrive at their own conclusion, then what is the point of science or the search for truth?



What's the point of being open-minded if we're never allowed to come to a conclusion? What's the purpose of researching a matter, examining the arguments for and against the various theories, and weighing the merit of each if at the end of the day we can't say one option is better than another?

To the second bolded part - most atheists scoff at Christians and their "belief". Your double standard is evident as well. Closing your mind to the idea of God is just as close-minded.
As you must know there is no such thing as a "scientific fact". Science is a method not a fact. Science is useful to find out the nature of things that can be measured. The further science gets away from physical things that can not be measured the more it gets into theory. Cosmology is a good example.

There is no such thing as a "settled scientific fact". Science is never settled. To say otherwise is not to know how scientific method works. Sure some "facts" are more settled than others but no scientific "fact" is settled. Science is always unsettled. What is believed today as a "fact" is found not true tomorrow. Scientists always are looking to doubt what they think is a fact and looking to challenge them with new scientific studies to challenge them. To conclude, as too many scientists do, that there is no God is not to be open to a possibility that there is a God. That is not how great scientists practice their method.
 

panhandler62

Territorial Marshal
Mar 26, 2008
7,646
868
743
Martinsburg, WV
As you must know there is no such thing as a "scientific fact". Science is a method not a fact. Science is useful to find out the nature of things that can be measured. The further science gets away from physical things that can not be measured the more it gets into theory. Cosmology is a good example.
Your concept (knowledge is not static) is on target but you need better examples. Much of cosmology is very much a thing that can be measured and theory is not the realm of the "un-measurable." Big Bang cosmology is empiracle. M theory, however, is not. M theory is internaly valid (the math works) but it is not possible to confirm that it describes *this* reality.

A "scientific fact" is some value or relationship that we accept as fixed within the context of stated conditions, such as the ratio of gravity to the EM force; 2.4x10^(-43). This is a scientific fact. It is not immutable (we may find that our measurments are not as good as we hope they are) and there may (hopefully) be conditions that can modify it but, it is accepted as fact because we have, to date, found no variance to this statement in stable conditions.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
62,021
45,748
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
As you must know there is no such thing as a "scientific fact".
Oh, yes there is. I've been through this with Aviation09. That a cubic centimeter of water at sea level weighs 1 gram is a scientific fact. Scientific facts are observable, intrinsic, immutable properties. The heart pumps blood. That is a scientific fact. Pumping blood is an observable, intrinsic, immutable property of the heart.

I think what you mean to say is that scientific theories and hypotheses are not facts. That would be true. Facts support scientific theories and hypotheses, and the more facts that support theories and hypotheses the more confidence we have in them. But that does not make the theories or hypotheses facts.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
10,800
6,361
1,743
Landlocked
As you must know there is no such thing as a "scientific fact". Science is a method not a fact. Science is useful to find out the nature of things that can be measured. The further science gets away from physical things that can not be measured the more it gets into theory. Cosmology is a good example.

There is no such thing as a "settled scientific fact". Science is never settled. To say otherwise is not to know how scientific method works. Sure some "facts" are more settled than others but no scientific "fact" is settled. Science is always unsettled. What is believed today as a "fact" is found not true tomorrow. Scientists always are looking to doubt what they think is a fact and looking to challenge them with new scientific studies to challenge them. To conclude, as too many scientists do, that there is no God is not to be open to a possibility that there is a God. That is not how great scientists practice their method.
I wasn't really trying to get into all that. My question is still valid, though.

What's the point in searching if there are no conclusive answers?
 

panhandler62

Territorial Marshal
Mar 26, 2008
7,646
868
743
Martinsburg, WV
I wasn't really trying to get into all that. My question is still valid, though.

What's the point in searching if there are no conclusive answers?

We don't need a conclusive answer to everything. We search, we learn, we grow. I would hope that we never acheive some sort of functional omnipotence where we have a factual catalog of such a substantial portion of all possible knowledge that there is no longer a need to search.
 

GodsPeace

Joshua 1:9
Aug 20, 2004
31,294
13,475
1,743
39
Stillwater
We don't need a conclusive answer to everything. We search, we learn, we grow. I would hope that we never acheive some sort of functional omnipotence where we have a factual catalog of such a substantial portion of all possible knowledge that there is no longer a need to search.
Don't worry. Some mysteries will remain because I don't believe we have the capacity to fully discover their origins or meanings.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
10,800
6,361
1,743
Landlocked
We don't need a conclusive answer to everything. We search, we learn, we grow. I would hope that we never acheive some sort of functional omnipotence where we have a factual catalog of such a substantial portion of all possible knowledge that there is no longer a need to search.
I never said everything. But some things...

People discovered the earth was round many hundreds of years ago after the popular belief was that it was flat. So you're telling me that in a few hundred years we may find out that the earth is actually a different shape altogether? People quit investigating it because the Earth was found to be a round shape. Case closed.

My belief is that we'll never get to that magical place where we know everything. There will always be new frontiers (see Star Trek).

My whole point here is that if people take your viewpoint (that conclusions should or can never be reached) then God should always be a possibility. However, my belief is there ARE indeed conclusions that each person can make based on the evidence that they see. Some people have concluded that God exists. Some have concluded that He doesn't exist.

I still think Christmas is more fun for those who believe in Santa.
 

panhandler62

Territorial Marshal
Mar 26, 2008
7,646
868
743
Martinsburg, WV
I never said everything. But some things...

People discovered the earth was round many hundreds of years ago after the popular belief was that it was flat. So you're telling me that in a few hundred years we may find out that the earth is actually a different shape altogether? People quit investigating it because the Earth was found to be a round shape. Case closed.

It has been generaly known that the Earth is spherical for a couple thousand years. I wouldn't say "case closed" though because we have improved upon that knowledge by learning that the Earth is somewhat egg shaped and that this shape is somewhat maleable.

We did not quit investigating.


My belief is that we'll never get to that magical place where we know everything. There will always be new frontiers (see Star Trek).

My whole point here is that if people take your viewpoint (that conclusions should or can never be reached) then God should always be a possibility.

Even though it is scientificaly correct to say that God has not been demonstrated, it would be foolish to proclaim that God is not possible. Some will reference the principal of parsimony, saying that we should default to non-acceptance without proof but parsimony is only a rule of conveniance, not a bounding logical condition.

There are things we can conclude, such as the fact of the relationship between the EM and gravitational force that I posted earlier, but even these we should hold as conclusions only under the understanding that we have no reason at this time to question their permanance.

However, my belief is there ARE indeed conclusions that each person can make based on the evidence that they see. Some people have concluded that God exists. Some have concluded that He doesn't exist.

I still think Christmas is more fun for those who believe in Santa.
I believe that Santa, like many other fictional entities, exists in so far as we emulate the qualities the meme is renouned for.
 
Apr 19, 2010
202
0
0
How convenient is it to say that god is real, and apply all sorts of rules or attributes to what people say god is, and say its impossible to say god is not real. Same applies to any fictional character including an invisible elephant that now has an invisible brother elephant living in my den. Prove he doesn't exist.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
10,800
6,361
1,743
Landlocked
How convenient is it to say that god is real, and apply all sorts of rules or attributes to what people say god is, and say its impossible to say god is not real. Same applies to any fictional character including an invisible elephant that now has an invisible brother elephant living in my den. Prove he doesn't exist.
Where did the idea of God come from, then?
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
10,800
6,361
1,743
Landlocked
It has been generaly known that the Earth is spherical for a couple thousand years. I wouldn't say "case closed" though because we have improved upon that knowledge by learning that the Earth is somewhat egg shaped and that this shape is somewhat maleable.

We did not quit investigating.





Even though it is scientificaly correct to say that God has not been demonstrated, it would be foolish to proclaim that God is not possible. Some will reference the principal of parsimony, saying that we should default to non-acceptance without proof but parsimony is only a rule of conveniance, not a bounding logical condition.

There are things we can conclude, such as the fact of the relationship between the EM and gravitational force that I posted earlier, but even these we should hold as conclusions only under the understanding that we have no reason at this time to question their permanance.



I believe that Santa, like many other fictional entities, exists in so far as we emulate the qualities the meme is renouned for.
Are you saying we can never know anything?
 

panhandler62

Territorial Marshal
Mar 26, 2008
7,646
868
743
Martinsburg, WV
How convenient is it to say that god is real, and apply all sorts of rules or attributes to what people say god is, and say its impossible to say god is not real. Same applies to any fictional character including an invisible elephant that now has an invisible brother elephant living in my den. Prove he doesn't exist.
What impact has the invisible elephant had on your life and what secondary and/or subjective evidence gives you reason to suspect his existance?